Minecraft Forums

thanks for the reply... it sounds like it gave you a sense of familarity or deja vu.

I'm trying to describe that "feeling" you get when you first start playing the game. To any new players out there, can you grace us with a description of your first impressions while they are still fresh in your mind?

To everyone else, if you were to try to sell the idea of minecraft to someone who's never heard of it, how would you describe it?

It would be best if these descriptions were to focus on the multiplyaer aspect of the game, but anything will do.

Quote from Lemoneight

They're level 15. 15 is the highest, same as sunlight. Last I checked, most lamps aren't brighter than the sun.

? So make it 17. Last I checked, the brightness of video game sunlight was totally arbitrary.

Now if they'd just make them 1 or 2 light levels brighter, gosh dang it. Want to put your lights more than 4 spaces above your floor? Too bad, your house is infested with monsters.

A recently finished project our builders are pretty proud of.

New players (Guests) can join this server in a probationary capacity at anytime, no need to write an application. Once you prove that you can play well with others, you are promoted to full membership.

:smile.gif:

Quote from Sheltered

Let's say your inventory is full and you need to return to your base. When you later return to mining, do you continue on the long tunnel or do you start a new one? :biggrin.gif:

I was just about to concede your point. But then I realized that if you're just digging a long straight tunnel, it is probably out of laziness. In which case there is no motivation to return to the very end of the tunnel to resume mining where you left off. you can just start a new tunnel in some other direction.

I believe that no matter where you stop in either the branch mine or the straight tunnel, the total distance traveled to dig the mine and return to the origin will be the same. Since there is (usually) no reason to return to the end of the straight tunnel after making a drop-off, it eliminates the disadvantage you would have if you were to travel the extra distance to get back there. The only scenario in which this wouldn't be true is when your inventory became full or your pick breaks before you had finished mining ores that have already been exposed. So I guess it is possible that you might save a very little bit of time traveling while branch mining. Though I don't think it is enough to cancel out its other disadvantages.

Edit: Then I realized you can only start a new straight line tunnel in so many directions (4) before you will have to do something that resembles branch mining an awful lot. Maybe branch mining is inevitable to a certain degree, but they should be spaced far apart anyway.

Damn, two concessions in one post.

Quote from -Freshmeat

When you branch mine properly, you do at least 3-space, and you do _very long_ branches. Personally I branch 200 blocks out, three to the side, then 200 home if I need cobblestone. Coal deposits are sometimes seen twice (in and out), diamonds never. If I have plenty of cobble I do 300 or 400 shafts. The main branch has a railroad, so I get back and forth pretty quick. Gives a steady supply of gold, iron and dimonds, in fact I tend to forget moving stacks of diamonds along when I relocate. I have more ressources apart from cobblestone than I can use, so I think branch minig is pretty efficient.

I do branches because it is a great way to unstress. Nothing but you, your diamond pickaxe, and time to reflect on the day that passed. I guess it is a bit like fishing in that respect. Other people with different tempers might find it boring, so do whatever rocks your boat.

Well I find branch mining tedious, myself. Which is probably why I'm out to disprove its popular status as an effective mining strategy.

Also, it doesn't matter how long the branches are or how far they are spaced apart, the branch mine will never be as effective as digging a straight 2x1 tunnel, in terms of number of blocks exposed per number of blocks broken. Nor will it be superior in terms of travel distance (I'm pretty sure).

Another advantage of the straight line is that you don't have to plan it or make sure your branches are spaced properly (cuz there aren't any).

Quote from DrRedstoner

Digging straight down is better.
You expose 5 blocks per 1 block destroyed.

Not so... You're not counting all the blocks you have to dig to get back up to the surface! :smile.gif:

I haven't checked, but I think it would at least cancel out the advantage you get from digging straight down.
Also, Lava.

I was critiquing branch mining in another thread and thought I ought to just make my own thread specifically about the subject, and to point out that digging a straight line is superior to branch mining in terms of overall effectiveness.

--------------
First of all, branch mining exposes fewer blocks than digging in a straight line for the same amount of effort made.

The reasons for this are 3 fold:
1) It doesn't matter if you miss blocks in one area as long as you have an equal chance of finding diamonds in another area. So you're not going to find *more* diamonds on average by making sure you don't miss diamonds in one area, when it is just as effective to look for diamonds in some other area.
2) With branch mines, you have closely spaced parallel tunnels and there is a risk of re-encountering an area you have previously excavated, this will therefore reduce the overall average number of blocks you newly expose per block you break.
3) With branch mines, at the junction between each branch and the main tunnel, you need to break blocks on a wall where the surfaces of as many as 4 blocks, which are adjacent to the blocks you're breaking, have already been exposed. This will slightly contribute further to an even lower ratio of exposed surfaces per broken block.

A 3-spaced branch mine is slightly more effective than a 2-space due to reason #2, above. A 4-space is even more effective. But an infinite space (straight line) mine is the best overall.

-------------------
Secondly, there is no advantage in way of travel distance with branch mines over straight lines. When people believe that branch mining confers a benefit in the way of reduced travel distances, they don't take into account the time needed to travel back up each branch after reaching its end.


OKAY... consider these scenarios...
Note: When counting the number of blocks exposed in each method, I didn't count the 4 blocks adjacent to the origin, because I considered them already exposed. In other words, I presume clearing the origin block was not part of the process.

A.) Consider this branch mine.

Note:
1) that 15 spaces of digging effort were made.
2) that 41 blocks were exposed during the digging, beyond the initial condition, and including the excavated blocks of the tunnel itself.
3) that if 1 return trip is made, 30 blocks need to be traversed in order to dig the mine and return to the origin. Remember: You have to count the distance you must travel to go back up each branch after reaching its end.








B.) Now consider this really long straight tunnel.
Note:
1) The same effort was expended building it. 15 spaces were dug.
2) 45 blocks were exposed beyond the initial conditions, and including the excavated blocks of the tunnel itself. That's 4 more blocks uncovered than the branch mine.
3) If you count the number of blocks that were traveled building the tunnel and returning to the origin, you will find that it was 30, which was the same distance we had to travel to build the branch mine and return to its origin.



Is there anything important that I've missed?

OKAY... consider this scenario...

You expend effort digging a branch mine and digg 15 spaces...

Note:
1) that 15 spaces of digging effort were made.
2) that 41 blocks were exposed during the digging, beyond the initial condition, and including the excavated blocks of the tunnel itself.
3) that if 1 return trip is made, 30 blocks need to be traversed in order to dig the mine and return to the origin.








now if you consider this really long straight tunnel
Note:
1) The same effort was expended building it. 15 spaces were dug.
2) 45 blocks were exposed beyond the initial conditions, and including the excavated blocks of the tunnel itself. That's 4 more blocks uncovered than the branch mine.
3) If you count the number of blocks that were traveled building the tunnel and returning to the origin, you will find that it was 30, which was the same distance we had to travel to build the branch mine and return to its origin.

Quote from Shanman13

Branch mining is often used because you cover a larger area and don't have to walk back quite as far. Mining a 1x2 tunnel exposes 6 blocks for every block moved forward, so by mining branches just 20 blocks long on each side, you uncover 244 blocks for every row you do. Go through 20 rows, spaced out like so: (if O is tunnel and X is rock) OXXOXXOXXO and you've uncovered 4880 blocks and only have to walk at most 40 blocks to return to your hub, as opposed to the 810 you have to do if you mine in a straight line.

I'm not sure this is correct... EDIT: But I'm still working on the proof. RE-EDIT: You're not counting the blocks you travel going back up each branch! See my post farther down the page.

Why branch mine? It's pointless. Just dig in a straight line.

I find it pretty effective, looking around in abandoned mines at low levels. As far as mining goes, branch mining is mathematically less effective than just digging a long straight 2x1 tunnel. UNLESS, for some reason you are restricted to a finite space in which to mine, at which point there might be some theoretical point to branch mining.

I agree about making redstone wire a solid block. I don't know what the motivation was making it a 2D object as it currently is, but I think it was a dumb idea. Making it a 3D block would save a lot of space otherwise taken up by cumbersome supporting structures.